Veterans Affairs Committee on June 7th, 2016

[Gary Walbourne]

In my opinion—I know there would be a small uptake of resources—first and foremost, attribution of service should be determined by the Canadian Armed Forces. It is absolutely critical. If we did that, I would put my reputation on the line that we could cut four to six weeks from the 16 weeks up front.

Second, I think we need to make a commitment to these injured soldiers and tell them they don't take off the uniform until they tell us they're ready or we have everything in place for them.

Those are the two things that I'd look at right now.

With those two moves alone, you don't have a transition problem anymore. The soldier is being well taken care of, still wearing the uniform, still gainfully employed in whatever type of work that may be, but they're not left waiting 16 or 18 weeks to determine if there's going to be a cheque or if there's going to be a future.

If you want to do something real quick, I think those are the two things we need to do.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Perfect.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Mr. Eyolfson is next.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you.

We've mentioned operational stress injuries, and mental health in general. Would you say that your members are satisfied with the level of mental health services that they're able to access, or are there barriers to accessing the mental health services they need?

[Gary Walbourne]

Especially when I'm on the ground visiting these clinics, we do take the time to talk to the patients. For the most part, what I hear is that once they're in the fold, the service is great. They're taken care of. They're not only talking about their immediate needs, but people are also starting to talk about their future needs. Again, kudos back, because I think they're doing a good job with what they have.

I think our bigger problem comes from, as your colleague mentioned, those who don't want to come forward. Those are the ones I think we hear about. Those are the ones who scare me. They're at home self-medicating, or whatever that might look like. That's my fear.

I think the last barrier to coming forward is universality of service. I really believe it is. I think until we have found a way to work around that anomaly or that issue in the environment, I think we will continue to have a tail to this problem.

I must say that although some of the people who are doing the delivery on the ground are overtaxed in areas, it's almost like a camaraderie is built with the patients. It's really nice to see. They do a good job when they get the opportunity.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Great. Thank you.

Actually, you just mentioned something that's leading right into my next question. It's almost as though we planned this.

You mentioned those who stay at home and self-medicate. I'm a physician, and one of the things we know, first of all, is that substance abuse itself is a diagnosis as opposed to a moral failing. As well, we know that substance abuse is often the first outward indication that there's a mental health problem. If someone has attempted to self-medicate, they haven't told anyone about their mental health issues. The first sign that comes to anyone's attention is that they're caught drunk driving or something like that.

Now, if members who've been in the service have been disciplined for substance abuse issues, or even if there's just been a recognition of substance abuse issues, does that itself seem to throw up any barriers for care?

[Gary Walbourne]

I don't think it throws up barriers. If there are disciplinary issues or engagements between the chain of command and the member about this type of behaviour, I think it opens a door for us. It opens a door to start having a conversation along different lines.

I believe the flavour on the ground is starting to change. If someone is presenting themselves with this type of behaviour, I don't think the stick is the first tool pulled out of the bag anymore. I believe there is an opportunity and a deeper desire to have a conversation around that.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

That's good to hear.

That's something in our profession that we're started to notice as well. If someone is brought in by ambulance and they were drunk driving, don't report them to the police, but look at what kind of underlying problems they have. It's good it's being dealt with in the same manner.

When substance abuse is the main issue, are your members describing adequate treatment programs?

[Gary Walbourne]

Had you asked me this question a couple of years ago, I would have said yes. I think we were on our way at that point to building up a very robust area of substance addiction counsellors. However, what I understand has happened over the last 18 or 24 months or so is that there's been a reduction in those numbers.

We have heard from the JPSUs on the ground that removing these types of capabilities from their organization has had an impact to the case managers. As you would know, sir, substance abuse issues in and of themselves need to be learned, understood, and managed, so to lump them in with something else doesn't do them justice.

We're a little concerned about the positions that have been taken out of the environment. Again, it's another program that we're following up on to see where we're going to go. We've asked the question on whether the positions are going to be brought back into the environment. However, it was a concern that was raised by some of the clinics on the ground.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you.

Have you ever heard any reason that these positions were cut in the first place? Was that ever communicated to you?

[Gary Walbourne]

No. I think it was just that through whatever type of reduction, that just happened to be the position that was cut. Especially if they weren't staffed, it was very easy to cut them from the list. I haven't heard any concrete reason for doing that, other than that there will be another venue available. I'm still waiting to see what that will look like.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Sure.

How much time do I have left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

You're down to one minute.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

It's reassuring to hear, as I say, that this issue is being recognized, because that's been a big problem, even in my own profession. There are some who are still catching up with that and not understanding that this is not an opportunity to punish, but an opportunity to recognize that there is a problem and that this is someone who needs help. It was good news to hear that this is what's being worked on.

I can't think of any other questions right now, so I'll yield the floor. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Mr. Kitchen is next.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you again.

As Mr. Van Kesteren has said, oftentimes when we have two or three rounds here, people are asking the questions that you had written down. I still think Ms. Romanado's looking over my shoulder, because she's asking all the ones I'm looking at.

Also, kudos to you for your concise and informative answers. Thank you very much.

We've talked a little bit about families, and that's probably why Ms. Romanado and I are familiar.... We both come from military families. You've mentioned a bit about families and providing information for them beforehand. I know you've answered that, and I appreciate your comments about providing that education, providing the information to the employer.

Can you give us any information on what other countries might be doing in this manner?

[Gary Walbourne]

We've done a cursory look at what our allies have done, and it varies across the board. The U.K. has a very strong charitable arm wrapped around everything that goes on. The U.S., as we can read by the headlines, is struggling in some areas, doing good work in others. We are taking a collective view of all the best practices. We're not there yet, but we do want to see what other forces are doing.

Again, we need a Canadian solution, but I think there are best practices we could adopt.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you.

I'm going to throw a case study at you for comments you might have.

[Gary Walbourne]

That's why I have my director general of operations with me.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Let's say we're dealing with an individual who indicates they're in dire need. They've made an application that may be denied or may have actually been delayed. They're probably, or may have been, suffering from PTSD or an operational stress injury, and they've just been released from a treatment program. All of a sudden they come to us, as members of Parliament, and say to us, “Help me with this.”

When I hear that scenario, I'm thinking that's a cry for help. Often when we talk about this term “cry for help”, we express it after the tragedy has happened. We've talked a number of times about a suicide hotline of that manner being made available ASAP. Can you make any comments on that for us?

[Gary Walbourne]

It keeps going back to access, access, access. It's no good to have a problem if there's no access to relief for that problem.

Suicide hotlines are available in just about every community across the country. We do have the ability to interject into issues if there are compelling circumstances in which we feel there would be harm to the member or others. We can very quickly get the chain of command's attention. I can tell you that once something of that magnitude is brought to their attention, they engage, and they engage very quickly and very heavily.

The Veterans Ombudsman's office is another opportunity. They have the ability, in compelling circumstances, to bring resources to bear. I think it goes back to educating people. I was surprised, when I first went across this country, at the number of people who didn't know they had an ombudsman. It was an office that had been in existence for 15 or 16 years, and people didn't know that we even had an ombudsman.

It comes back to education and having things readily accessible and available. I think that's where we are.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Do you have any recommendations to us? If someone phones our office and our staffers take that information, who should we call? Who should we access so that we can have quick action? A lot of times our constituents are sitting out there. What do they do? They're crying for that help, so they do call our offices. We're sitting there going, “Okay, how do I answer that?”

[Gary Walbourne]

As long as you promise to give me top cover with my minister, I'll put this out there.

If you have a member who is in a crisis moment, call our office. Get hold of us. We can bring resources to bear that you might find a little more difficult to get access to. If there is no other venue available to you, call the ombudsman's office, most definitely. Have the member call us. You can call on the soldier's behalf. We can reach out. We have resources.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Is there a number you can provide to each of us that we can give to every member of Parliament? It would be good if they could phone as a member of Parliament.

[Gary Walbourne]

We'll make sure you get that information, sir. We'll send it back to the committee.